Sunday, December 17, 2023

The God Culture: Sabbath 2nd Conference

On January 30th, 2021 Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture was a guest speaker at the Sabbath 2nd Conference hosted by The Sabbath Believers Congregation at the AFP Commissioned Officers Club inside Camp Aguinaldo. 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=133898745238662&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..&type=3

In attendance and also speaking was "Dr." Butch Belgica.

Timothy and Butch

Oddly enough The God Culture made no mention of this conference on their Facebook page and apparently never informed anyone that they could sign up to attend even though the Facebook page of the group hosting this conference issued a public invitation.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=119042413390962&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..

From the following schedule we see that Timothy was the main speaker being allotted 3.5 hours, with a 30 minute break, to speak between 1 - 4:30 pm. 

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=119042366724300&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..

The fact that Tim was the main speaker at a religious conference belies The God Culture's claims that Tim is not doing religious work in the Philippines. He mostly certainly is doing such work whether he wants to call himself a minister, a missionary, evangelist or whatever. It is direct confirmation of what The God Culture previously said of themselves but which they later scrubbed from their website.
"The God Culture now re-enters the evangelistic ministry in conducting conferences beginning in the Philippines"
Thankfully a portion of this talk was recorded and uploaded to YouTube by someone who attended the conference. Sadly it's only 47 minutes long. Because this is ostensibly the first public talk Tim has given since the pandemic started and he began publishing his books let's take a look at a few things he says.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdDriHYAgfc

The video description reads as follows:

We attended last Saturday in AFP Convention Center a conference about Ophir in Philippines, it is hard to believe but this man seems to be knowledgeable in what he is saying. Timothy Jay Schwab, is an author of several books including Solomon’s gold, Ophir and a like. Hearing him for the first time gave me a different perspective of our country that according to Timothy, the Queen of Sheba have brought to Israel and gave a lot of gold to King Solomon. Watch this video till the end and you will hear him explain his discoveries about our country Philippines the land of Ophir. Ophir- gold

This is a rather interesting comment from someone who was listening to Timothy speak for the first time. "He SEEMS to be knowledgeable," she writes. And it's true. Listening to Tim speak he does appear to be knowledgeable. He is throwing fact after fact at you so fast that all one can do is take it all in. Fact check? Why bother? Or better yet...how? How does one fact check everything the man is saying when there is so much to corroborate? Who has the time or the know-how? Does the uploader of this video who, according to her Facebook page, lives in China and works at a medical university have the time and the know-how to fact check Tim? 

Timothy Jay Schwab is knowledgeable. The problem is that he does not interpret or put together everything he knows correctly. Sometimes he even leaves out key information. That means he lies by omission. Here is a rather astounding claim he makes in the video:

21:59 Does the Philippines have elephants? Well I don't see any out there right now, right? But you did. In history, in archaeology there are hundreds of elephants that have been found, their bones, that pre-date the Sultanate of Sulu because they try to say elephants were introduced in the 1300s by the Sultanate. That's not true because we've got elephant bones in this nation that predate that and there's hundreds of them and they're all over the archipelago. They're all the way up and Apayao, Cabarruyan, all the way down in Davao, in Manila. Fort Bonifacio they even found a rhino, an ancient rhino there, which is ivory.

Listening to that for the first time who wouldn't be "wowed?" Elephants in the Philippines that pre-date the Sultanate of Sulu? Who knew!? But it's a lie. A lie of omission. A half-truth. Here is the passage in his book "Solomon's Treasure" which discusses this.

However, one must overlook tons of archaeology in order to conclude elephants were not native to the Philippines including the very latin identification of species which is specific to the Philippines such as Rhinoceros philippinensis unearthed in Fort Bonaficio along with Stegedon luzonensis, Bubalus cebuensis, a dwarf buffalo found in Cebu and Elephas Beyeri named after anthropologist H. Ottley Beyer who found these bones on Cabarruyan Island In Luzon.
pg.100
And here is my comment on this passage from my review of his book.
Actually what Tim is describing is not archaeology but paleontology and there are not tons of it but merely a few prehistoric fossils. Instead of proving to the reader how the existence of the fossils of a prehistoric rhinoceros, stegedon, dwarf buffalo, and dwarf elephant proves that the Philippines was teeming with elephants and was a major source for ivory during the time of Solomon, Tim merely states it as a fact and claims he could write a whole book about the subject. He then goes on to record the testimony of Jesuits who wrote of the existence of elephants in the Philippines. But Tim already admitted those elephants were imported to the Philippines by the Sultanate of Sulu from Java in the 1300's which is long after Solomon.

Were elephant bones found in the Philippines? Yes. But Tim neglects to tell his audience that these are the bones of prehistoric animals who were extinct long before the year 1000 B.C. when Solomon sent his ships to Ophir. That is called a lie of omission. A first time listener, such as the lady who uploaded this video, would be amazed at this information but without fact checking Tim they would remain even more ignorant than before they heard him because now they have information which they think they understand but do not. 

Just before this Tim mentions the lack of architecture in Ophir which he claims is the Philippines.

21:00 They want archaeology right? Where's the archaeology? Where's the great architecture? There's no record of any architecture in any story of Ophir that we have ever read. Doesn't say anything about architecture. It says it was a humble people. They’re a people that came from the experience at the tower of Babel who were getting away from that lifestyle and returning to Him from everything that we need which we find in this nation, now even today for that matter.

This is all ad hoc conjecture. There was no great architecture built in the Ophir because the people are humble? How does he know that?  He doesn't!  He is literally making stuff up. Nowhere does the Bible describe the people of Ophir as humble. And what does humility have to do with the lack or presence of architecture? It's a non sequitur. Why would the Queen of Sheba not live in a palace or in a city fortified with walls? Tim makes a big to-do about the Philippines having walls as being a prophetic signifier. 
Again, this is where some attempt to force Britain into this when it is interpreted "young lions." However the word in Hebrew is also defined as "a village covered by walls." Anyone visiting the Philippines quickly notices the entire nation is a walled village. Most properties are fenced in with large concrete walls or the like.

This is a further fit to the rest of Isaiah's prophecies about the Philippines in context as Ezekiel knew as well the significance of this land.

Around the world man has built lasting monuments of architecture for various reasons. One of the oldest cities in the world you can visit is Çatalhöyük. Were these people not humble? Do only non-humble peoples build cities and temples and walls like the Great Wall of China and the Roman aqueducts? Was Solomon, who built cities as well as the temple, not humble? How about Nehemiah and those who restored the walls of Jerusalem and rebuilt the temple. Were they not humble?  The idea is nonsense.

The idea is also detrimental to his entire case. In the video, as in his book, Tim starts off proving Ophir existed from an inscription on a pottery shard found in Israel. But he has nothing to prove exactly where Ophir is located. There are no inscriptions on ancient ruins saying, "This is Ophir" or anything similar. The real purpose of Tim saying something so crazy as, "There was no architecture because the people were humble," is to remove the burden of proof from him. Now he does not have to go out into the field and do actual archeological work to prove his claim. His whole case is not based on archeological work. He is no Ron Wyatt. He's an armchair enthusiast who's entire case is built on whatever books and articles he has come across on the internet as well as all the conjecture he concocts about "testing the resources of Ophir." With no concrete proof of the location of Ophir Tim's claim for the Philippines remains a claim. One claim among many. There is nothing irrefutable about it.

Tim says that "there's no record of any architecture in any story of Ophir that we have ever read." Of course there isn't! The stories about Ophir are all about gold and other treasures. He is arguing from silence which is illogical. The absence of evidence is not an evidence of absence. That is, to say that there is a lack of architecture does not mean there never was any architecture. Yet Tim declares the absence of architecture is evidence there never was architecture. That is unsound reasoning.

You know what else we don't read about in any story of Ophir? How their society was constructed. Did they not have a society? What kind of foods they ate. Did they not eat? How they mined the gold. According to Tim they did not mine the gold by digging deep into the earth. It was mainly alluvial deposits with perhaps a few nuggets "just below the surface!"

16:47 But whatever this land is would have to have what we call alluvial deposits. They would have to have gold on the surface or just below the surface. The Philippines does, did in history throughout and I'll cover a little bit of that.

Again this is all conjecture. Tim does not know how the people of Ophir or even Filipinos in the year 1000 B.C. were mining gold. He has no evidence and is making stuff up. To say that Ophir would HAVE to have alluvial deposits is totally ad hoc. Why does the land HAVE to have alluvial deposits? How long would it take for them to pan rivers to come up wth billions of dollars worth of gold and continue to do so over 3 millennia? How deep is "just below the surface?" Tim does not say even though the nature of gold mining is a very important detail. 

His book is not any more enlightening on the subject.
Most of the gold in the prehistoric and early historic periods would, however, undoubtedly have been extracted by panning alluvial sediments, a technique requiring little capital investment in equipment and no specialist technology, but unfortunately leaving no discernable archaeological signature.
Except for two sentences on page 96 this is the only word on the subject of ancient gold mining techniques in his entire book! And it's a throwaway quote at the end of a chapter on page 94 which he does not even discuss. It is also a very general statement and not specific to the Philippines. The article this quote is from also mentions ancient mining shafts being found in Vietnam.
There is some evidence of ancient gold mining in Southeast Asia – ancient shafts have been reported in Central Vietnam at Kham Duc (pers. comm. local villagers), an area which is linked by the river to the protohistoric sites of Go Ma Voi, and at Go Mun, 65 km southwest (Nguyen Kim Dung et al., 1995; Nguyen Kim Dung, 2001).
This is evidence that ancient peoples did know how to extract minerals from deep in the earth. Why wouldn't ancient Filipinos have done the same? Why could there not have been lode mining in the Philippines or Ophir? It seems there was. Antonio de Morga testified there was lode mining in the Philippines when he wrote the following:
All these islands are, in many districts, rich in placers and mines of gold, a metal which the natives dig and work.

Some placers and mines were worked at Paracali in the province of Camarines, where there is good gold mixed with copper.

These natives possess rich mines, many of gold and silver mixed.

There are also many gold mines and placers in the other islands, especially among the Pintados, on the Botuan River in Mindanao, and in Sebu, where a mine of good gold is worked, called Taribon.

That information is not discussed in Tim's "Monumental case for the Philippines no one can disprove" though Tim does provide two of those quotes. The first quote is found on page 150 and the second on page 154. Tim comments as follows:
When the Spanish arrived, Filipinos already had and possessed knowledge to mine gold in a gold rush from antiquity and work it with great skill. Gold mines were found all over the archipelago and this was widely reported by Spanish chroniclers.

pg. 155, "Solomon's Treasure"
The testimony on pages 154-155 contradict Tim's assertion in his presentation and earlier in his book that the mining must have been primarily alluvial. Here we have testimony from eyewitnesses and historians, as well as an admission from Tim, that Filipinos knew how to mine gold and not just by panning rivers. So why not include that information on page 96 where he "tests" the resource of gold and discuss how Filipinos were both lode and placer mining before the time of Job? The two sentences on page 96 I referred to above are:
Above Pigafetta describes from two different translations, though pretty much the same, that the King of Butuan was able to secure a gold nugget the size of a chicken egg or walnut by simply sifting the earth or seeking in the ground. This actually fits with what would have to be the case in the ancient land of gold from at least 1000 B.C. as there was no major mining equipment in that era.
p. 96, "Solomon's Treasure"
What a non sequitur. "There was no major mining equipment in that era" therefore the gold would have to be found easily on the ground or in rivers. The conclusion does not follow the premise. There was also no major construction equipment when the Pyramids and Stonehenge were built either so I guess they don't exist, right? It's typical fallacious and unsound reasoning from Timothy Jay Schwab.

There is another problem related to gold mining and that comes from the Book of Job.

Solomon's Treasure, p. 30

The gold of Ophir was renowned in the scripture even before the days of Solomon as Job first writes of it.
Job 22:24 KJV  
Thou shalt lay up gold as dust, and the gold of Ophir as the stones of brooks.

Job 28:16 KJV 
It cannot be valued with the gold of Ophir, with the precious onyx, or the sapphire.
Many scholars agree the Book of Job was written before the days of Moses and is the oldest book of the Bible. Here Job is aware of Ophir even in his time as having the most valuable gold and he even ties in onyx just like Genesis 2 which is no coincidence. Job knew what this region represented and likely, where it was at least generally in direction as Noah and his sons were conscious because they once flourished there and cherished the memory of Ancient Havilah. 
Furthermore we read on page 136 of "Solomon's Treasure" that Job knew of Ophir despite having no ships. Tim then deduces that the Ophirians, Filipinos, had to bring goods to Israel for trade. This poses quite a lot of problems which Tim does not seek to resolve. Let's view it on a timeline which many have used and still use. Job is placed here between 1700 and 1600 B.C.

https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~226099~5505934:Composite--Adams--Synchronological-

On this same map, which is Sebastian C. Adams’ Synchronological Chart of Universal History, we see Joktan, the father of Ophir and Havilah, dated a few hundred years earlier between 2230 and 2100 B.C.


 

Bishop Usher in, "The Annals of the World," does not significantly differ from this map planing the birth of Ophir between 2247 and 2234 B.C. For Job he gives the date 1628 B.C. Both chroniclers give a margin of about 600 years between the birth of Ophir and Job. 

That might seem like a perfectly long enough time for a nation to become world-renowned for its resources and to have built a mighty shipping army to deliver them around the world. Certainly the USA did it in less than 200 years but they possessed technology ancient people did not. In his book Tim posits a timeline where Filipinos were sailing to Vietnam by 1500 B.C.  Notice also that he gives 2200 as the date for when Ophir allegedly returned to the Philippines with his brothers. 

pg. 168

The source for his claim about such early trade with Vietnam comes from a paper titled, "Coastal Connectivity: Long-Term Trading Networks Across the South China Sea." This is a paper about trade amongst nations across the China sea. But this paper is not relevant to whether or not Filipinos were sailing all the way to Israel for trade in the time of Job which would predate trade with Vietnam. Tim offers no proof that Filipinos were sailing anywhere in the year 1500 B.C. except to neighboring lands. It appears he is arguing that if Filipinos were trading with Vietnam then they were also trading with Israel. The second claim does not follow from the first and is an invalid argument. Without proof it would be unwise to follow Tim in that ad hoc speculation. That something could have happened does not mean it did happen. The unfalsifiable claim that Filipinos were sailing to Israel in the time of Job is even more reason to scoff at the slogan of his book which is "The monumental case for the Philippines no one can disprove."

Finally there is the issue of gold mining. If Job knew about the gold of Ophir and its worth 600 years after Ophir was born that would mean that within that timeframe a huge mining industry had sprung up as well as trade networks. Why should we think such industry would be primarily alluvial and not lode mining as Tim claims? There would need to be a massive amount of gold pulled out of the land and panning rivers alone isn't going to cut it. Then you would need a craft industry to mold the gold into statues and jewelry and whatever else. Then there would have to be a shipbuilding industry to construct the large boats to move the goods. Just how exactly did Ophir and his brothers get to the Philippines? Where did they get the technology to build ships and sail them? It cannot be Noah because Noah did not sail his ark. He was shut inside and the flood took him where it pleased. Noah was by no means a sailor.

Tim offers zero proof for such large scale mining, crafting, trade networks or shipbuilding prior to 1500 B.C. His timeline places gold mining at 1000 B.C. but even he acknowledges that mining would have to have begun long before that date if the Philippines is Ophir. Tim's timeline does not fit his own claims.

Let's not forget that Enoch 8:1, which Tim thinks is scripture, says Azazel made known to men the metals of the earth and taught them the art of working them. In 8:3 we are told that other Nephilim revealed the secrets of the constellations, sun, and the course of the moon which are things all ancient sailors would need to know or else they would get lost.
1. And Azâzêl taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals 〈of the earth〉 and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all colouring tinctures.

3. Semjâzâ taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, Armârôs the resolving of enchantments, Barâqîjâl, (taught) astrology, Kôkabêl the constellations, Ezêqêêl the knowledge of the clouds, 〈Araqiêl the signs of the earth, Shamsiêl the signs of the sun〉, and Sariêl the course of the moon.

 https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe011.htm

This would mean that Ophirians, Filipinos, by mining gold and other materials and fashioning them into various ornaments and then becoming able sailors who necessarily used the stars, sun and moon to guide their course were doing the evil work of the Nephilim. In his videos Tim repeatedly mentions and rails against the Nephilim. But here he crows about and counts it as a good thing that Ophir, the Philippines, is the land of gold and the people are doing the evil work of the Nephilim by mining and working gold. He calls it a 3,000 year gold rush and a sign of prophecy.

Tim also claims that the gold of Ophir is special because Adam, who he says was in Ophir and thus the Philippines offered up gold, frankincense, and myrrh as an atonement.

9:58 You see, Solomon wasn't just going to some land that had grains of gold. He was going to the Genesis 2 land of gold. The land of Adam and Eve where you see Adam made a sacrifice of atonement the next day when he was exiled from the garden. Do you know what that sacrifice was? Gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

This is a lie. His sources for this claim are the Book of Jubilees and the Cave of Treasures. 

Jubilees 3:27 And on that day on which Adam went forth from the Garden, he offered as a sweet savour an offering, frankincense, galbanum, and stacte, and spices in the morning with the rising of the sun from the day when he covered his shame.
Cave of Treasures: And Adam took from the skirts of the mountain of Paradise, gold, and myrrh, and frankincense, and he placed them in the cave, and he blessed the cave, and consecrated it that it might be the house of prayer for himself and his sons. And he called the cave "ME`ÂRATH GAZZÊ" (i.e. "CAVE OF TREASURES")
Neither of these passages says anything about gold being offered up as an atonement. Jubilees does say Adam offered up incense and VanderKam's commentary refers this incident in Jubilees to Exodus 30.

The details that v. 27 supplies regarding the sacrifice direct the reader to Exodus 30, where, as Moses is on Sinai, God reveals to him the rules for the incense offering.

pg.228 VanderKam's Junbilees Commentary

Is the incense offering an atonement? No! It represents the prayers of the saints.
Rev 5:8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

8:4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.
You can read more about it here: What was the significance of the altar of incense?

Maybe Timothy Jay Schwab is unaware that ONLY BLOOD makes an atonement for sin. That's why according to "The Legends of the Jews" Adam sacrificed a unicorn.

The first time Adam witnessed the sinking of the sun be was also seized with anxious fears. It happened at the conclusion of the Sabbath, and Adam said, "Woe is me! For my sake, because I sinned, the world is darkened, and it will again become void and without form. Thus will be executed the punishment of death which God has pronounced against me!" All the night he spent in tears, and Eve, too, wept as she sat opposite to him. When day began to dawn, he understood that what he had deplored was but the course of nature, and he brought an offering unto God, a unicorn whose horn was created before his hoofs, and he sacrificed it on the spot on which later the altar was to stand in Jerusalem.

Now if you do the research you will find out that Louis Ginzberg who wrote "The Legends of the Jews" uses the Life of Adam and Eve and the Cave of Treasures in compiling his collection. Tim in his book calls the Cave of Treasures factual though he does not admit it to be scripture. The Cave of Treasures is based largely on The Book of Adam and Eve which Tim lists on his source page.

https://www.ophirinstitute.com/sources

It's strange Tim only lists the Second Book of Adam and Eve when the first book contains information about the Cave of Treasures. In that book's telling of the story the angel Michael brings Adam golden rods, Gabriel gives Adam incense, and Raphael gives him myrrh. Adam then gathers these and places them in the Cave of Treasures. There is nothing about an atonement being made. In fact they are tokens of God's covenant with Adam.  That can all be read here starting at chapter 29.

The point is that all the books about the Life of Adam and Eve are legends. The Cave of Treasures was written hundreds of years after Christ in the seventh century by a Christian and necessarily has Christian symbolism in it. To call legendary material factual is ridiculous and Tim might as well teach that Adam sacrificed a unicorn for atonement if he's going to consider The Cave of Treasures historical.

Let's look at the final thing which really seals the deal. This is Tim's sales pitch once you have been bombarded by his propaganda. At this point in the presentation he has recited a lot of facts and he has revealed a conspiracy to conceal those facts. He says:
38:59  They don't want you to know because prophecy says when you do know you will rise.
This is based on a wrong interpretation of Matthew 12:42. From his book we read:
Matthew 12:42 KJV (Parallel in Luke 11:30) 
The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
The Queen of the South still remains a designation of Cebu and Iloilo to this day and she will rise up. This means Messiah knew she would be put down for a season. She will judge this generation which is the final generation as in the passage, He defines this era where people will be seven more times demon possessed. Who came to hear the wisdom of Solomon? The Queen of Sheba. This is the Philippines which ascends to a position on the world amphitheater . It ill have a say in the judgement of the world and it's hierarchy. this is significant. We believe we are already beginning to witness the grass roots moment which will lead to this fulfillment. Ezekiel confirms the timing as Sheba, Tarshish and DDN, Philippines will rise up early in the narrative not at the end.
pg. 252
Tim interprets this passage to be a prophecy that the Philippines, personified as the Queen of the South, will rise up in the end times, reestablish God's law, and condemn the New World Order.
These isles in the East will judge the New World Order and the final generation not on Judgement Day but now. In order to become a judge one must have an adherence to the law or they have no measure by which to judge. Wait til you find out Yahuah will restore His law in the archipelago.

pg. 245
That is really all nonsense. The problem with all this is to be found in the preceding verse of Matthew. It seems Tim has completely overlooked Matthew 12:41.
Matthew 12:41 
The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
If Tim is going to be consistent then the nation of Iraq, which is where Nineveh is located, will also rise up and condemn the New World Order by restoring God's law. Of course that's not going to happen. Neither is the Philippines going to restore God's law for the law is a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ and Christ has come. The law is no more. That is the message of both Hebrews and Galatians. Tim's message that Filipinos will restore God's law is fundamentally anti-Christian.

The simple message of Matthew 12 is that those people who demanded a sign from Jesus are condemned for not believing the miracles and signs already given. It is Jesus who is greater than Jonah and Solomon yet those wicked men refused to believe on Him without a sign to their liking while Jonah and Solomon were believed on even without signs. Therefore at the judgement day the Queen of Sheba and the Ninevites will rise up and condemn those wicked people for their unbelief. Why would Jesus, in the midst of condemning those people, give a prophecy about the Philippines in the end times? He wouldn't and he doesn't.


Faith in Christ is not enough! The law is what redeems us!

Now put yourself in this lady's shoes. You never heard of The God Culture, you never heard the claim that the Philippines is Ophir. But now you are presented with all this information by a white man in a Hawaiian shirt who is speaking authoritatively and seems to know what he's talking about. He is in fact the main speaker at the conference you are attending which means others definitely believe what he teaches and this instills him with some authority as an expert. He even shows you three books he is selling where you can read all this information for yourself in detail. You are overwhelmed with amazement and wonder why you never heard this stuff before. Tim gives you the answer. It's been hidden from you on purpose because once you know you will be empowered to Rise Up. How could you not succumb to his spell and believe his spiel? It would be very hard not to believe. Maybe you would reserve belief until you have fact-checked him. But as evidenced by the scores of people who believe he is speaking truth, not many have actually done that even though Timothy says "Test all Things." 

at No comments:

Saturday, November 25, 2023

The God Culture: Follow the Method

Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture has a new 52-week study series about the apocrypha. It is based on his two-volume set of books which claims to test the apocryphal books. I have written an article on each volume showing forth Tim's awful and uneducated methods defending or rejecting the apocrypha (vol 1, vol 2). It is this method which I would like to further explore. 

Apocrypha Test: Part 2: Who Decided Bible Canon? History of the Bible.

In a comment on this video Tim says one should follow his method to find out the truth. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEHB3rowk8I&lc=UgzStsCHOWRh56weQzV4AaABAg

@jawnatutorow: Ok, I have a question. If the pharisees at Jesus time were imposters, why did Paul respect them when they told him Ananias was the high priest, and Paul apologized and said it is written you should not speak even of a ruler of your people?

@TheGodCulture: You mean Paul when on trial with his life in the hands of the Pharisees? Can you read? Are you really incapable of the comprehension of a child? When you try to quote a scripture, quote it and do so in context. First, Paul rebukes the Pharisees many times and the illiterate modern church thinks he is rebuking Moses when he taught Moses' Law but rebuked Pharisee application. Why do you think he ended up in front of them on trial? How do you not know? In this account you try to cite inaccurately in context, Paul invokes he was a Pharisee by birth thru his father likely, yet he was a Hebrew thru his mother which are 2 different things if you new how to read Paul. If he did not show respect to the Pharisee ruler publicly especially when in chains and on trial in front of them, which is rather sad to think you do not know any of Paul's story it appears, he would be dead far earlier. Paul was not stupid. How is it you do not know that is the actual question here? Some of them still wish to kill Paul even so but understand he publicly covered himself by showing respect for what was a recognized position though Paul well knew the Pharisees were fakes. He warns of their Jewish Fables and endless genealogies in 1 Timothy 4. Read all of that chapter and he lays out the Pharisees guilty of old wives' fables as well. In 2 Timothy 4, he predicts many will fall for these Jewish fables of the Pharisees. In Titus 1:14, Paul says: " Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth." The real question here is how is that you think that his rebuking the Pharisees accusing them of propagating the commandments of men and lies turning men away from the truth somehow equals his endorsing their righteousness when he never did. Yes, when on trial, he invokes his Roman citizenship by birth, his Pharisee bloodline from his father, his Hebrew blood from his mother, and his learning from a very famous Pharisee at a young age in his defense while on trial. His defense was accurate and it worked that time especially. However, you see that as his endorsing those he rebuked? Really? This is an extremely illiterate way to read anything. Follow the method on this channel and you will learn to fix this. Attempt further debate in ignorance as you certainly do not know Paul and do not represent his words, be muted. Our channel, our rules. Yah Bless.

I want to analyze this comment and response and show that the method used by Timothy Jay Schwab is only going to lead one into ignorance. 

@jawnatutorow: Ok, I have a question. If the pharisees at Jesus time were imposters, why did Paul respect them when they told him Ananias was the high priest, and Paul apologized and said it is written you should not speak even of a ruler of your people?

Now, this person echos the very same question I have said about Tim's assertion that the Pharisees were impostors. Nowhere in the scripture does Jesus, or in this case Paul, ever condemn them for being impostors. They are condemned for hypocrisy but never for being Samaritan impostors. It's a deadly blow to Tim's claims. 

But watch how he uses his method to make the question irrelvant. I am going to take this a section at a time. Someone should tell Tim to punch the enter button once in a while and start a new paragraph. There is no need for unreadable blocks of text. 

@TheGodCulture: You mean Paul when on trial with his life in the hands of the Pharisees? Can you read? Are you really incapable of the comprehension of a child? When you try to quote a scripture, quote it and do so in context.

The very first part of Tim's method is to mock and ridicule the commenter. This is the same method he uses when discussing the work of Dead Sea Scrolls scholars. They are dismissed as illiterate buffoons. 

First, Paul rebukes the Pharisees many times and the illiterate modern church thinks he is rebuking Moses when he taught Moses' Law but rebuked Pharisee application. Why do you think he ended up in front of them on trial? How do you not know?

The second part of Tim's method is to twist facts and erect straw men. It is true that Paul rebukes the Pharisees but it is NOT true that the Church thinks or teaches Paul rebuked Moses. That is simply nonsense. Paul says very clearly he upholds the law but at the same time he is very adamant that the law leads us to Christ and because Christ is come it is now done away with. That is why the Church does not teach the law of Moses except insofar as it leads men to Christ. We are no longer under the law but under grace. That dichotomy of law versus grace, of the old versus the new covenant, is Christianity 101. 

In fact, Paul did not end up on trial for rebuking the Pharisees but because the Jews thought he brought a Gentile into the temple and that he was teaching against the law. 

Acts 21:27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him,

28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.

29 (For they had seen before with him in the city Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)

 

Acts 22:21 And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.

22 And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live.


Acts 24:5 For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:

6 Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.

7 But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,

8 Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.

9 And the Jews also assented, saying that these things were so.

 

Acts 25:7 And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove.

8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.

See that? The charges have NOTHING to do with Paul rebuking the Pharisees. In fact the Pharisees were ready to let Paul go when he spoke of the resurrection!

Acts 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.
Tim calls this commenter illiterate but one must really wonder about his reading skills. 

In this account you try to cite inaccurately in context, Paul invokes he was a Pharisee by birth thru his father likely, yet he was a Hebrew thru his mother which are 2 different things if you new how to read Paul.

The third part of Tim's method is to apply to the enemies of Christ twisted and ridiculous bloodlines. In his view everyone who is not with Christ is a nephilim of some variety. Here we see Tim referring to the Pharisees as some sort of bloodline different from that of the Hebrews. The fact is the Pharisees were a SECT of Judaism which has nothing to do with genetics. There are NO genetic Pharisees just like there are no genetic Catholics, Buddhists, or Muslims. 

If he did not show respect to the Pharisee ruler publicly especially when in chains and on trial in front of them, which is rather sad to think you do not know any of Paul's story it appears, he would be dead far earlier. Paul was not stupid. How is it you do not know that is the actual question here?

The fourth part of Tim's method is to take a familiar Bible story and twist it all out of proportion. In his hands Jonah is no longer swallowed by a fish as the text actually says but he was swallowed by Leviathan and taken all the way around Africa. In this story Paul knew these Pharisees were fakes but deferred to them as being legitimate in a cowardly bid to save his life. Just look at how Tim defames Paul by calling him a dissimulating liar who was looking out to save his life rather than die for the truth as he proclaims he is ready to do in his letters. Incredible. 

Some of them still wish to kill Paul even so but understand he publicly covered himself by showing respect for what was a recognized position though Paul well knew the Pharisees were fakes. He warns of their Jewish Fables and endless genealogies in 1 Timothy 4. Read all of that chapter and he lays out the Pharisees guilty of old wives' fables as well. In 2 Timothy 4, he predicts many will fall for these Jewish fables of the Pharisees. In Titus 1:14, Paul says: " Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth."

This is more of Tim's fourth method. Now 1 Timothy becomes a warning against the Pharisees. In fact, according to Tim most of what Paul writes is against the Pharisees because they were the main number one enemy then and now. Case in point Tim says that Paul only knew the false Pharisee way of keeping the law and he had to relearn how to keep it the correct way. 

https://youtu.be/9Id0VB5fM5M?t=1821

30:22 However Paul kept the Pharisee law in his teachings back then but Pharisee teachings. Ok? Those do not attribute to him keeping the actual law because the Pharisee law is not the law. Therefore having been a Pharisee it did not mean Paul understood the law or the Bible any better than anyone else. He would have to relearn, really unlearn first, and then relearn the entire law because they had leavened pretty much all of it and turned it against, so Paul was learning really a new law when you think about it.
It is simply false that Paul had to relearn the correct way to keep the law. As a Pharisee of the Pharisees he kept it quite correctly and he taught, especially in Galatians and Hebrews, that the law had passed away because it's fulfillment in Jesus Christ had come. 

The real question here is how is that you think that his rebuking the Pharisees accusing them of propagating the commandments of men and lies turning men away from the truth somehow equals his endorsing their righteousness when he never did. Yes, when on trial, he invokes his Roman citizenship by birth, his Pharisee bloodline from his father, his Hebrew blood from his mother, and his learning from a very famous Pharisee at a young age in his defense while on trial. His defense was accurate and it worked that time especially. However, you see that as his endorsing those he rebuked? Really? This is an extremely illiterate way to read anything. 

Here we several of Tim's methods come to the fore. There's the nonsense about Pharisee bloodlines, there's calling the commenter illiterate, and we also have Tim misrepresenting the original question. 

The commenter did not say Paul endorsed the righteousness of the Pharisees. That is NOT the question. What the commenter asked is: 

If the pharisees at Jesus time were imposters, why did Paul respect them when they told him Ananias was the high priest, and Paul apologized and said it is written you should not speak even of a ruler of your people?

There is not a single word about endorsing their righteousness. What is being endorsed is their position as leaders and teachers of Israel and especially the High Priest being legitimate. 

Here is what Paul says in Acts 23: 

1 And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.

2 And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth.

3 Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?

4 And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest?

5 Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.

6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.

Jesus says much the same thing.

Matthew 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

Jesus rebukes the Pharisees but he NEVER calls them impostors. He says they "sit in Moses' seat" and are thus the legitimate rulers and judges of Israel. That is the issue here and Tim simply does not want to deal with it honestly. 

Follow the method on this channel and you will learn to fix this. Attempt further debate in ignorance as you certainly do not know Paul and do not represent his words, be muted. Our channel, our rules. Yah Bless.

Finally Tim concludes his non-answer to the question as to why Paul did not call the Pharisees impostors. He says following his method will lead to right conclusions and then he warns the commenter to not comment again "in ignorance" or he will be muted. And what is Tim's method? It is:

1. Insult the inquirer.

2. Misrepresent the question.

3. Twist the scriptures.

4. Reduce everything to bloodlines.

5. Warn any inquirer to never ask a hard question again or else be muted.

That is no method to get to the truth. It is a method to conceal the ignorance of Tim who cannot be bothered by hard facts which prove his teachings to be false. This method is used in all his videos, books, and comments. If you are interested in truth don't follow this method and certainly do not follow Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture. 

at No comments:

Saturday, October 21, 2023

The God Culture: Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 2

Timothy Jay Schwab, also known as The God Culture, has finally released volume 2 of his testing of the Apocrypha. You can read my review of volume one at this link.

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 2

As I noted in my review of volume one there has been so much ink spilled about these books that Tim's contributions are absolutely not needed and they are in no way helpful. I am not interested in rebutting or affirming the canonicity of these texts but in showcasing Tim's awful methodology. 

The fact is the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox consider the Apocryphal books to be canonical scripture. For some reason Tim is under the impression that the exclusion of these books from Protestant Bibles is a conspiracy to hide the truth. That is simply not the case as prior to the 19th century all Protestant Bibles contained these books. The reason they were removed was purely a cost saving measure by Bible translation societies. 

In 1826, the National Bible Society of Scotland petitioned the British and Foreign Bible Society not to print the Apocrypha, resulting in a decision that no BFBS funds were to pay for printing any Apocryphal books anywhere. They reasoned that by not printing the secondary material of Apocrypha within the Bible, the scriptures would prove to be less costly to produce. The precise form of the resolution was:

That the funds of the Society be applied to the printing and circulation of the Canonical Books of Scripture, to the exclusion of those Books and parts of Books usually termed Apocryphal.

Similarly, in 1827, the American Bible Society determined that no bibles issued from their depository should contain the Apocrypha.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Bible

This removal then became the standard for all Protestant Bibles. Yet Tim writes:

Though Wisdom of Solomon direct fragments are not found in Qumran, it is clear the community read and used it as inspired. When our modern Canon is not following this firmly established precedent, one must wonder what the agenda of modern scholars may be. 

pg. 37

Is this guy so stupid as to not realize that scholars do not, have not, and never will determine the Biblical Canon? Is he also so stupid as to not realize anyone can buy a Bible with these books in it? Take note that Tim admits no fragments of the Wisdom of Solomon were found in Qumran. Of course he cites a few scholars to help him prove otherwise which is rather hypocritical of him. 

Now, keep in mind that Tim's guiding principle as to what is and is not scripture is "Was it found at Qumran?" The Wisdom of Solomon was not found at Qumran but that does not stop Tim from rejecting it because a few passages from the Dead Sea Scrolls appear to cite it. Tim then proceeds to prove Wisdom was quoted in the New Testament and says something rather interesting:

This is extremely compelling that the Wisdom of Solomon was quoted in the New Testament and most importantly, whether attributed to that book or not, the doctrine is there. 

pg. 41

So, something can be in the Bible without being directly spelled out? Did Tim forget that he denies the Trinity because the word is not the Bible? The concept certainly is though. 

The History of Susana was also not found at Qumran but again that is not stopping Tim from declaring it was because of a tiny fragment that appears to have "a few points of contact."

In our view, a "few points of contact" to Susanna's one chapter in fragments this small is solid in being able to affirm it found there. Fragments are all we have of most of the scripture found there and they had no problem trying to stretch the Proto-Esther Fragments belonging to 1st Esdras over to Esther in fraud.

pg. 52

In "vetting" Susana Tim claims one scholar, J.T. Milik, actually thought the book was found at Qumran but changed his mind due to "pressure."

Initially. J.T. Milik suggested this fragment as belonging to the story of Susanna. He changed his view in the end but likely due to pressure. 

pg. 53

In fact many scholars are covering-up the truth due to "pressure."

Basically, the math is simple. Out of 10 criteria, Susanna passes on 8 of 10 with an 80 percent score. The two criteria in which it doesn't agree, also do not correspond to Judges. However, Judges 19 fails miserably with a 50 percent score fitting 5 of 10 criteria. What kind of scholar cannot conduct such a simple test to decide? The kind that does not wish to perhaps due to pressure. This is gross negligence. This Qumran fragment squares to Susanna in content as Susanna was found there. 

pg. 58

Of course Tim does not tell us who is pressuring these scholars or why they are doing it. It's simply ad hoc nonsense because Tim thinks he is right and everyone is wrong. 

Both Bel and the Dragon and The Prayer of Azaryah were also not found in Qumran.

In light of the ancient association of Daniel and its addendum of Susanna, which was found in Qumran, it is more than reasonable to connect both Bel & The Dragon as well as Prayer of Azaryah as all three small books were once considered part of, and attached to, the Book of Daniel. 

Though no direct Qumran fragments exist for this one chapter, the association is firm as demonstrated by the Greek Septuagint (LXX)from the B.C. era, Theodotion's Greek Version 1811, and the Egyptian find of Papyrus 967 especially (McLay [108]). Bel & The Dragon was also found in manuscript form in Cod. Ambmsianus (MS) [oaf. Cyprian (257) quoted Danie114:5 which is Bel & The Dragon published as the Book of Daniel [84]1811. Origen  defended it as canon. Pope Damasus I (305384) included Daniel as “one book" incorporating Susanna, Bel & The Dragon, and Prayer of Azaryah. The tradition is well established. It does not matter that there may be some publishing from the ancient era which separated these books. What matters is that they were together in some form published within Daniel. 

pg. 63 

Just as with Bel & The Dragon, even without fragments in Qumran, we find the association strong enough that Daniel did include these addendums as his practice. When one reviews this powerful prayer, it certainly rings true in content as well. There is nothing to be afraid in perusing this small book. At the end of the full publishing of this book, we will vet the plausibility of the details. 

pg. 68
Tim's proof that these texts were used at Qumran is because anciently they were all part of the Book of Daniel. 

Sorry not sorry but that is not enough. Let me restate Tim's criterion for Biblical Canonicity once more:

The first and sole true judge of historicity is whether or not a text was found affirmed in the Dead Sea Scrolls where the Temple Priests were who kept the only official Bible Canon to the First Century. 

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 1, pg. 68

Also known as the "Book of Wisdom" or simply as "Wisdom" in some translations and quotes, direct fragments of the Wisdom of Solomon were not found present in Qumran. However, it was used by the author °floral community documents such as 4QInstruction. It appears this book was included in the original Greek Septuagint which dates in origin to the 300-200 B.C. era. Unfortunately, many scoffers would claim we do not know if Wisdom of Solomon was originally there even though it carried through tradition for thousands of years. However, with the connection to Qumran, there is no debate on that point. It was certainly perceived and used as inspired scripture in that time and more importantly than Egyptian translators or the Pharisees such as Josephus, by the actual Qumran/Bethabara exiled Temple Priests. They are the final word on the Old Testament Canon from the time of Moses and really Jacob to the First Century. 

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 2, pg. 31

Old Testament Canon from the time of Jacob? But there is no scripture until the time of Moses. This undoubtedly means that Tim believes the Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs are scripture.

https://youtu.be/sWflamM2Bu4?si=OBx-g5VsylRPBw0f

These three additions to Daniel as well as the Book of Wisdom were not found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls in Qumran. Therefore, according to Tim's criteria, they are not part of the Old Testament canon. End of story. 

Needless to say there is a lot of nonsense in this book. In an attempt to defend the historicity of Bel and the Dragon Timothy Jay Schwab has an entire section devoted to proving dragons existed.

pg. 193

Were dragons real? Who cares! That's NOT what Bel and the Dragon is about! Did he even bother to read this book? And it goes on for 10 pages!

pg. 197

The Incredible Hulk shows up on page 173 as Tim attempts to prove that the demon Asmodeus from the Book of Tobit was actually a demon possessed Nephilim giant. 

pg. 173

Actually this image is titled "3D Illustration Giant Monster" and you can buy it for $9.98 at Shutterstock. But if you search this image on Google you get the Incredible Hulk because it's clearly a rip-off.

Probably the most important section in this book is Tim's attempted dismissal of Maccabees as falsified history. This section is 40 pages long and is a very convoluted interpretation of history that barely cites from Maccabees except in derision. Let's take a look at a few things he says.

By 165 B.C., Greece was distracted and otherwise engaged as they were in decline. Multiple battles with Rome for over live decades were taking a toll. Greek resources were shifted back to Greece to fight the Romans and it makes no sense for a Greek ruler to begin to act as a dictator. The entire narrative of Antiochus IV Epiphanes needing to enter the Temple to sacrifice a pig instigating another front of war with Judaea would not just be incredibly stupid timing, it never happened, It was the Samaritans who sensed the absence of Greek power and in that vacuum, they seized the opportunity to assault and capture the Temple never returning it to the Levites. They claim to be Levites yet all the sons of Zadok were in the Temple at that time managing worship and none lived in Samaria from where the Maccabees originated. The problem for Maccabees is they came from a foreign country, not Judaea. No sons of Zadok were there in Modrin, and they were not Levites. They were foreign invaders conquering the Temple which they had desired for many centuries. 

pg. 257

Ah yes, it was the Samaritans who assaulted Jerusalem and took over the Temple. Where is this history recorded in the New Testament or anywhere else? It isn't. It's not there. At no time when Jesus encounters the Samaritans does he mention such a history and when he condemns the priests he never calls them fake Samaritans. 

Tim goes on to interpret Daniel 8:9.

And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

He interprets it this way:

This passage also identifies that this Little Horn rises from inside of the same horn in which Jerusalem is located. Thus, this is not a mystery in the slightest. Jerusalem is in Ptolemy and this enemy, which is not Greece though part of its conquest, are just to the Northwest of Jerusalem which must still be Ptolemy. They cannot be the Seleucids who are already an identified horn and this one is new rising out of Ptolemy which narrows this down. The area there falls outside of Judaea in Samaria but Southern Samaria at this time was still part of Ptolemy's region still. The locals still observed the separation of Judaea from Samaria but Greece and even Rome later, never really did. The Seleucid area begins just North of that which would no longer be Ptolemy and cannot conform to Daniel's prophecy. It is a complete lie that Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Seleucid, defiled the Temple according to Daniel. 

This must be a power within Ptolemy, smaller than all of Ptolemy, that rises, thus was not risen as a power yet in those days. It cannot be a full horn of four, but a Little Horn rising as a portion of one of the four, and it attacks Ptolemy's portion of Jerusalem including the Temple especially. This means Daniel defines Josephus and Maccabees as a false history as both fail to even understand the geography of those days. The Seleucid Antiochus IV Epiphanes was not from Ptolemy, is not a new power, and cannot rise out of Ptolemy when the horn of his authority was already in power since Alexander's death, and not new. That traditional interpretation has always been harebrained and uneducated. The Dead Sea Scrolls fully reveal this.

pg. 259-256 

This is 100% wrong. The Little Horn is not Samaria. It is Antiochus who warred against Egypt (the south),  the East (Persia), and Israel (the pleasant land.) Samaria did not attack Egypt. Antiochus IV did and that is exactly what Maccabees tells us. 
1 Maccabees 1:16 Now when the kingdom was established before Antiochus, he thought to reign over Egypt that he might have the dominion of two realms.

17 Wherefore he entered into Egypt with a great multitude, with chariots, and elephants, and horsemen, and a great navy,

18 And made war against Ptolemee king of Egypt: but Ptolemee was afraid of him, and fled; and many were wounded to death.

19 Thus they got the strong cities in the land of Egypt and he took the spoils thereof.

20 And after that Antiochus had smitten Egypt, he returned again in the hundred forty and third year, and went up against Israel and Jerusalem with a great multitude,

21 And entered proudly into the sanctuary, and took away the golden altar, and the candlestick of light, and all the vessels thereof,

22 And the table of the shewbread, and the pouring vessels, and the vials. and the censers of gold, and the veil, and the crown, and the golden ornaments that were before the temple, all which he pulled off.

23 He took also the silver and the gold, and the precious vessels: also he took the hidden treasures which he found.

24 And when he had taken all away, he went into his own land, having made a great massacre, and spoken very proudly.
This invasion of Egypt is known as the sixth Syrian war and it is documented in history. Of course Tim does not discuss this because he is dead set on twisting everything he can to "prove" Maccabees is fake history. He also says Maccabees is not cited in the New Testament but that is not true. Paul alludes to the events of Maccabees in Hebrews 11:35.
Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:
That is a direct reference to 2 Maccabees 7.
20 But the mother was marvellous above all, and worthy of honourable memory: for when she saw her seven sons slain within the space of one day, she bare it with a good courage, because of the hope that she had in the Lord.

21 Yea, she exhorted every one of them in her own language, filled with courageous spirits; and stirring up her womanish thoughts with a manly stomach, she said unto them,

22 I cannot tell how ye came into my womb: for I neither gave you breath nor life, neither was it I that formed the members of every one of you;

23 But doubtless the Creator of the world, who formed the generation of man, and found out the beginning of all things, will also of his own mercy give you breath and life again, as ye now regard not your own selves for his laws' sake.
Clearly Paul thought the events of Maccabees happened or else he would not have included this bit in his Hall of Faith. 

As I noted Tim's invective against Maccabees is very convoluted and there is no space here to unravel it. What I have written above is quite enough to dismiss his false claims. This whole book is nonsense and I have skipped over quite a lot. Let me end with one more thing. In defending the Book of Tobit as scripture Tim says Acts 20:35 is a direct quote of Tobit 12:8.
For us, there are others we feel Charles and the 1611 KJV may not have found but this is good enough for the connection in secondary evidence. One fascinating controversial scripture is Luke writing of Paul's citation of Yahusha in Acts 20:35 "how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive." Yahusha did not appear to have said that in the Gospels anywhere and many scholars scoff instead of reconciling. However, it is a direct quote of Tobit 12:8: It is better to give alms than to lay up gold." Did Luke attribute the quote to the wrong person? Perhaps. Does that undermine the whole of scripture? Only for an idiot who is incapable of elementary understanding in these days of scoffing. 
pg. 27

However in volume 1 Tim says Acts 20:35 is a citation from Sirach. 

Also, Acts 20:35 credits Yahusha for saying “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” That is not a quote documented of Yahusha Messiah. This is a quote from Yahusha Ben Sirach 4:31 exactly.

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 1, pg. 73

Which one is it?

This book is just more worthless garbage from Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. There will be more. Tim hints at that in this book he is "testing" more texts in an attempt to restore the Bible. Not that the Bible needs restoring as we have the full Word of God despite Tim's assertions to the contrary.  

at No comments:

Friday, October 13, 2023

The God Culture: The Philippines Is Not Ophir

Have you heard the chatter across the internet that the Philippines is actually the Biblical land of Ophir? It sounds good but once the evidence is sifted the claims turn out to be completely false. Let's take a look at several important reasons why the Philippines is most certainly not Ophir. All of these points have been discussed in my articles debunking Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture. 



1. Josephus says India is Ophir

If we want to know where the land of Ophir is why would we not go back to the oldest sources? In the first century AD Josephus wrote an extensive history of the Jewish nation. He tells us in no uncertain terms that Ophir is the Golden Chersonesus which belongs to India. 

4. Moreover the King built many ships in the Egyptian bay of the Red Sea; in a certain place called Ezion-geber. It is now called Berenice; and is not far from the city Eloth. This countrey belonged formerly to the Jews; and became useful for shipping, from the donations of Hiram King of Tyre. For he sent a sufficient number of men thither for pilots, and such as were skilfull in navigation: to whom Solomon gave this command, that they should go along with his own stewards to the land that was of old called Ophir, but now the Aurea Chersonesus: which belongs to India: to fetch him gold. And when they had gathered four hundred talents together, they returned to the King again.
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-8.html

There is only one place in the entire world which is called the Golden Chersonesus and that is the Malay Peninsula. Therefore the Philippines is not Ophir. 

2. Timothy Jay Schwab agrees India has all the resources attributed to Ophir

In his testing the resources of Ophir The God Culture admits that India has all the resources attributed to Ophir. 

#33: Is India Ophir? 100 Clues The Philippines Is Ophir

2:29 One such claim is that India must be Ophir. Now we will give them that India does in fact have the resources on Solomon's list. Yes it does.

In his book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure he says the same thing. 

The only other coherent claim as far as resources are concerned is India yet it’s own history says it had a source of ancient gold and silver, isles to the East thus none of these make any sense except the Philippines. 

 Every resource of Solomon tests as native to the Philippines and all other claims fail in this chapter except India whose claim already failed the test of it’s own history. 

Solomon's Treasure, pgs. 110 and 115

Notice how in the same sentence Tim contradicts himself by saying India's claim does not fail but also fails the test of history despite Josephus claiming India is Ophir. What is important to note is that Tim admits India has all the resources of Ophir which affirms the historical claim of Josephus that Ophir is in India. 

3. No Ancient Map Shows the Philippines

If the Philippines is actually Ophir then why do all ancient geographies omit the Philippines? 

Because no ancient Romans or Greeks ever sailed to the Philippines. If they did then these expert cartographers would have included it in their descriptions of the world. As it is Ptolemy's map, which is the pinnacle of ancient geography, ends with the Golden Chersonesus and an enclosed Indian Ocean. There is no room for any islands east of the Malay Peninsula because no one had sailed that far east. Yet The God Culture claims Filipinos and Greeks were circumnavigating Africa to trade with one another until the time of Jesus Christ. That is ridiculous and there is simply no getting around this fact no matter how many hoops The God Culture jumps through.

4. Roman artifacts have been found in Mainland Asia but not in the Philippines

If the ancient Romans and Greeks had been sailing to the Philippines to trade then why is there no record of their presence? Roman coins have been found as far east as Vietnam.

Óc Eo (Vietnamese) is an archaeological site in modern-day Óc Eo commune of Thoại Sơn District in An Giang Province of southern Vietnam. Located in the Mekong Delta, Óc Eo was a busy port of the kingdom of Funan between the 2nd century BC and 12th century AD and it may have been the port known to the Romans as Cattigara.

The remains found at Óc Eo include pottery, tools, jewelry, casts for making jewelry, coins, and religious statues. Among the finds are gold jewellery imitating coins from the Roman Empire of the Antonine period. Roman golden medallions from the reign of Antoninus Pius, and possibly his successor Marcus Aurelius, have been discovered at Óc Eo, which was near Chinese-controlled Jiaozhou and the region where Chinese historical texts claim the Romans first landed before venturing further into China to conduct diplomacy in 166. Many of the remains have been collected and are on exhibition in Museum of Vietnamese History in Ho Chi Minh City.

Funan was part of the region of Southeast Asia referred to in ancient Indian texts as Suvarnabhumi, and may have been the part to which the term was first applied.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattigara

There have been plenty of archaeological digs and finds across the Philippines but no ancient Roman or Greek artifacts have ever been found in the Philippines. That is because they never sailed to or traded with the Philippines.

5. Ophir is Never Described as a Group of Islands

One thing The God Culture is fond of saying is that in the Bible Ophir is called "the isles in the east at the ends of the earth." 

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 89

These isles are East at the ends of the Earth and they are identified as Tarshish, Ophir and Sheba.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 93

However, the Bible never mentions Isles in the East or At the Ends of the Earth. 


https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/search.php?hs=1&q=%22at+the+ends+of+the+earth%22

Chapter 8 in his book is a very convoluted misinterpretation of Scripture but unravelling Tim's ridiculous Bible interpretation is beyond the scope of this article. Here is every mention of Ophir in the Bible. At no time is Ophir ever described as a group of islands.



https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/search.php?hs=1&q=ophir


What the Bible has to say about Ophir is very limited. All we know about Ophir geographically is that it is in the east from the Red Sea port of Ezion-geber. Other than that and the list of resources brought back nothing is known about Ophir.  Neither Ophir, Tarshish, or Sheba are ever described as being islands and to twist the Bible to make it say otherwise is bad hermeneutics. 

6. The God Culture Lies Too Much to be Trusted About Anything

The above five reasons are more than enough to reject any claim that the Philippines is Ophir. But The God Culture has gone a step further and produced a series of videos and a book full of convoluted, byzantine, and in some cases fabricated evidence to prove the Philippines is Ophir. Here are just a few of those claims:

Antonio Pigafetta saw elephants in the Philippines.

Fernando Pinto shipwrecked in the Philippines and placed them at 9N20.

Filipinos and Greeks regularly circumnavigated Africa to trade with one another. 

The Lequios Islands are Luzon Island in the Philippines.

Antonio Pigafetta's journal is the only eyewitness source to Magellan's landing in the Philippines.

Antonio Pigafetta claimed Samar Island is Cattigara. 

The Philippines is Antillia.

The City of Manila is mentioned on a 1492 map.

The Behaim map is Portuguese when it is really German. 

And the list goes on. 

Over the past few years I have meticulously dismantled and exposed the nonsense of Timothy Jay Schwab. He lies when he says no one has disproved him in seven years. I have done that a multitude of times and I will continue to do so. 

Conclusion

This is just a brief list of the many reasons the Philippines is not Ophir. I believe they are the strongest reasons. The oldest testimony as to where Ophir is locates it in India in the Golden Chersonesus. Ancient maps prove that no one knew anything past the Golden Chersonesus. The Bible never describes Ophir as islands in the east at the ends of the earth. Those facts cannot be overcome and with that Timothy Jay Schwab's case for the Philippines as Ophir is untenable ab initio.

at 3 comments:

Tuesday, September 12, 2023

The God Culture: Message To Congress

In late August 2023 Timothy Jay Schwab, also known as The God Culture, gave a talk in Davao at a conference hosted by Bishop Rod Cubos. Tim has posted a few selections from that lecture online and that is what I wish to discuss. 

Is Philippines Ophir? Recent News. Live in Davao. Message to Congress.

A message to Congress? But Tim is on record saying that The God Culture is apolitical. 

Ancient Prophecy Philippines: MARCOS Prophesied! The Life of Lam-Ang. Solomon's Gold Series 15B

3:40 Before we start The God Culture does not support political parties and that's not what this video is about. We don't endorse anyone, neither candidate nor nobody. We said nothing of this election that just took place. Not a word. 

Ok, that only says that Tim does not support any political parties which is fine since it would be illegal for him to do so as a foreigner. But that does not mean he is apolitical. His entire message that the Philippines will rise in the last days to condemn the New World Order is drenched in politics. Let us not forget that he claims The Ophir Institute, which he founded, is a think tank. 

https://www.ophirinstitute.com/bio

The Ophir Institute is a think tank in the Philippines that has focused on the mystery of the pre-colonial history of our country.

And what is the definition of a think tank?

A think tank, or policy institute, is a research institute that performs research and advocacy concerning topics such as social policy, political strategy, economics, military, technology, and culture. Most think tanks are non-governmental organizations, but some are semi-autonomous agencies within government or are associated with particular political parties or businesses. Think-tank funding often includes a combination of millionaire donations and individual contributions, with many also accepting government grants.

Think tanks publish articles, studies or even draft legislation on particular matters of policy or society. This information is then readily used by governments, businesses, media organizations, social movements or other interest groups as part of their goals. Think tanks range from those associated with highly academic or scholarly activities to those that are overtly ideological and pushing for particular policy, with widely differing quality of research among them. Later generations of think tanks have tended to be more ideologically-oriented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_tank

It is not clear if Tim has written any policy papers to be submitted to Congress but he has declared he is ready to appear before Congress to "restore these facts."

45:17 We will restore these facts. If we have to go to Congress ourselves we will restore these facts.

In fact the ground work is being laid as Tim claims his fraudulent book and videos are being taught in at least one  COLLEGE classroom in the Philippines. 

1:01:35 Of course we we understand there's a lot of professors out there whose jobs are at stake if they took a stand for this. But do you know there are some that are teaching this in classrooms? I won't expose them but there's one who asked us for Solomon's Treasure and we sent them copies for their classrooms. There's another one that's using the videos and they're actually showing Solomon's Gold Series in the college classroom.

Imagine this moron's book being taught in a college classroom. It is unfathomable. 

But Timothy Jay Schwab does have a message for Congress. Here it is:

What an Amazing Typo! It Should be Rappler not Rapper.

1:02:46 I want to do a little something if you don't mind. I'd like to give Congress an answer today. Will you do that? Will you rise to your feet with me? Will everyone stand to your feet ?And I want to do a little exercise, just a little exercise and I'm going to make sure this makes it to Congress, all right? This is our response to the Philippines as Ophir. We're going to say bring back Ophir. Amen? Let's do this. Bring back Ophir. Bring back Ophir. Bring back Ophir. Bring back Ophir.

How can Tim guarantee this response will make it back to Congress? Obviously he has connections. 

This video is so ridiculous and is full of the same nonsense Tim has taught for the past six years to Filipinos and then some. I am not going to rehash his erroneous worldview. Do see my God Culture archive for all that matter. 

What is to be noted here is that Tim is not a backwoods hick who caught Youtube fame on a lark. He is being supported by a lot of wealthy backers. Don't forget Timothy Jay Schwab once had a ritual dinner with the Lakanate of Tondo where he changed his name. 

This particular conference was put on by Bishops Rod and Ruth Cubos in Davao City. What are they Bishops of you might ask? Their own kingdom. They are not real Bishops but Tim loves them so much. What a hypocrite to spit on the Church and endorse these fake Bishops. 

Now, this video is basically a response to Congressman Dan Fernandez's privilege speech where he claimed the Philippines is Ophir and should be renamed as such. In this video Tim complains about people and groups such as Rappler dismissing the Philippines being Ophir without even reading his book. As if his book is the end all be all case for the Philippines being Ophir. Since it is a poorly written, poorly researched, and poorly argued book Timothy Jay Schwab should hope it never goes mainstream and he never appears before Congress to deliver his false message. 

at 2 comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

The God Culture: The Book That Changed The World

If there is one thing that can be said about Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture it is that he is a prideful and self-important man. T...